Why No Excuse

No Excuse is a blog focusing on poverty and poverty issues in Hamilton, Ontario. Look here daily for news items, events, resources, and a chance to engage in discussions with others on local poverty issues. No Excuse was originally staff-written when it was launched in 2007 as part of the Hamilton Spectator's Poverty Project, but it is now a community blog written by people who come from all walks of city life, but share a deep concern for poverty issues. See "Who Are We" for more information about our authors.

December 2009

December 23, 2009

By Bob WoodI’m relatively new to the Poverty Blog, having first put fingers to keyboard last May. Looking back at postings and stories from the past year (partly to see if I was making any sense), I noticed that there has been a lot more activity on the blog over the last little while. Since the blog focuses on poverty and poverty issues in Hamilton, does this increased activity indicate the situation is getting worse or that people are actually more hopeful that things might change for the better?I’m going to suggest that while things aren’t getting better, strangely enough there may be hope that improvements are on the way.What do you think?Is the dialogue going on here doing any good? I’ve got a sense that the issue of poverty is on the radar of a lot more people, including decision makers, than it has been in the past. The blog helps in that regard.But what has really changed for people living with low incomes? Using this blog as a vehicle, what more can we do?I’m going to suggest that the 2015 Pan Am/Parapan Games offers us an opportunity.I’m ducking the brickbats now. And yes, I know almost all of the arguments that such multi-event games benefit only a few in host communities and certainly not those living in poverty. But the games are coming whether we like it or not. In Vancouver, the Inner City Inclusive Community Housing Table developed “goals, action plans, and outcomes” in order to create lasting benefits from the Vancouver Olympics for their community. (You can find some background at http://vancouver.ca.commsvcs/housing)

I’ve heard talk of something like that here. Maybe we should take some initiative.

December 16, 2009

The Canadian Senate is the target of a fair bit of criticism.It is not always deserved. Substantial, thoughtful work is often done by Senate committees like the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology’s Subcommittee on Cities.The Committee spent two years looking at Poverty. Its report From the Margins: A Call to Action on Poverty, Housing and Homelessness came out last week. The report at just under 300 pages contains many good recommendations. Here is a summary of a few.

Social Assistance, Employment and Benefits-Provincial governments should increase current limits on assets for those trying to qualify for social assistance. (See my earlier posting.)-Employment Insurance (EI) benefits should be provided for longer periods; the waiting period should be removed; sickness benefits for those suffering medium term illnesses or disabilities should be expanded. -Resources should be found to prevent and address negative health outcomes associated with poverty and unemployment and to increase the Guaranteed Income Supplement for seniors and the National Child Benefit.

Housing-In addition to providing sustained and adequate funding for affordable housing, the federal government should work with the provinces and housing providers to ensure larger housing units for larger families are available.-The Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP) should be reformed so that people can make repairs and convert housing units for affordable rental accommodation. -The idea of providing housing subsidies to individuals rather than landlords should be looked at.

Human Rights and Support for Non-Profits -Groups over-represented among the persistently low-income should have access to funding to have legal representation in law reform cases with respect to their human rights.-And the committee calls for the recognition and stabilization of voluntary sector organizations to support their service delivery efforts but also the community building activities that “only this sector can provide.”

The Senators were distressed to find that when people get all possible income and social support to which they are entitled, they too often remain poor. Existing policies and programs entrap people in poverty, they concluded. Are any of you readers surprised at this conclusion? Read the report or its 14 page executive summary.I hope members of the House of Commons can take a break from their minority government shenanigans and read it too.

December 14, 2009

With the release of the auditor general’s report last week, there’s been a significant amount of chatter about Ontario’s social assistance programs. Tim McCarter, the auditor general, outlined some of the difficulties in the system in regards to “overpayments” – which as fellow blogger Bob Wood noted in the post below are often misrepresented as fraud. The report unfortunately diverts attention from the very real issues of deep poverty affecting families in receipt of social assistance.An individual on the Ontario Works program receives around $585/month to cover rent, food, clothing, hygiene products – and a phone so she/he can call back potential employers.Recently, the provincial government named a task force to review and simplify social assistance rules. This panel of social assistance experts will report back to the government with recommended changes by the end of next year.Hamilton has a number of recommendations ready for the panel. Over the past three months, the Hamilton Roundtable for Poverty Reduction has been working with a fantastic group of students through McMaster’s department social work to highlight the issue of inadequate rates and the need to change rules to move people out of poverty.The student researchers collaborated and met with individuals in receipt of social assistance. Out of that project came “Seven Ways to Change: recommendations for the improvement of social assistance.” Those recommendations include allowing social assistance recipients to earn up to the low income cut off before deductions occur, making appropriate post-secondary training opportunities more widely available, not forcing people applying for social assistance to divest themselves of savings and RRSPs, making the application process more user-friendly and creating a board to establish rates based on the real costs of living in communities.The students also developed a phenomenal video which highlights many of the core issues faced by individuals in receipt of social assistance. They liken trying to move out of poverty while on social assistance to swimming upstream against a current — an almost impossible task. This video doesn’t enable you to walk a mile in the shoes of somebody on social assistance, but I think it comes pretty close.

December 08, 2009

The Ontario Auditor General’s latest report has received a lot of media attention.With the report nearly three hundred pages long, it is not surprising that the media has to pick and choose what it will focus on.In this case, they seem to have come down on that old chestnut, welfare fraud. More on that to follow.But first I’ll say that they missed this bigger story — affordable housing programs don’t really build affordable housing.The auditor noted that as of March 2009, more than 10,000 new units created under the Rental and Supportive Housing Program cost $498 million. Moderate income households may be have been assisted but little help was given to low income households. More than 50 per cent of these units were not affordable as “many people on the waiting list could not afford the rent.” Why? Municipalities have to file reports on the number of units occupied. They have to show that they are charging 80 per cent of average month’s rents. But they don’t need to report on success in reaching objectives of actually housing low income people. Another program, the Housing Allowance/Rent Supplement program, was set up in 2005 to bridge the gap between what a low income household can afford and real rents.It only applies to vacant units and then for only five years. Are you surprised that a lot of tenants don’t see the value in moving to take advantage of the subsidy and then moving again after five years? After several years only 75 per cent of units and 71 per cent of dollars have been allocated. Initially, municipal bureaucrats had wanted the funding to apply to existing (not vacant units) and they were right.As for welfare fraud, the auditor was exercised about overpayments, making it sound as if those receiving them are the 21st century equivalent to Ronnie Biggs. In fact, overpayments typically are adjustments that need to be made after a recipient’s income changes. As for concerns about abuses of the dietary allowance, it is well documented that social assistance rates don’t allow for people to pay the rent and eat healthily. The real abuse here is that rates are too low.

Photo taken from woodleywonderworks photostreamhttp://www.flickr.com/people/wwworks/